Izzy's "demotion"

[Ringoturtle]

For myself, to be a evolution of music, there would have to be a continuum of musicians in the band.....  With guns there is only one member who has continuously been in the line up..   So to call the albums a evolution is wrong.  They are just different.  And to call them a evolution of just Axl, is also wrong.  Because CD is the first guns album he had full power and say on.   Now of the next album came out with the exact same musicians on it as CD and has a different sound, that could be argued as a evolution

It's certainly a stronger argument.

Agreed. That's it!

[TheBaconman]

Did the sound evolve because the people in the band changed, or did the people change because the sound evolved?





/jarmo

The sound never has evolved, it has changed.  And that's in part to having new musicians in the band and having Axl in the band as the boss

Did the people in the band leave because the music changed?  Maybe...   I think a few of the members left because Axl wanted to go in a different direction with the sound of the band.   They were employees at that time.  Not equal band members.  Would they of left if they were not employees?   I am not sure.  

You could argue that Axls musical tastes have evolved and have changed the direction of Guns..  But that will leas to the argument that Guns is ultimately the Axl Rose project...  

And again you cant even say his style has evolved on albums because he only had full control on CD, no other album

So was the CD a evolution of sound for guns or Axl?  No    It could of been the sound Axl has always wanted.  How is that a evolution if it is basically his fist album, with his first real sound

The true test of a evolution of sound would be the next album from guns.  If it had all the same players on it from CD, and moved in a different dirrection

[EmilyGNR]

For myself, to be a evolution of music, there would have to be a continuum of musicians in the band.....  With guns there is only one member who has continuously been in the line up..   So to call the albums a evolution is wrong.  They are just different.  And to call them a evolution of just Axl, is also wrong.  Because CD is the first guns album he had full power and say on.   Now of the next album came out with the exact same musicians on it as CD and has a different sound, that could be argued as a evolution

It's certainly a stronger argument.

I was trying to say the same thing. You said it better.

Although like I said, I dont think they have to have the exact same musicians? But to change the roster altogether except one, then yeah its completely different. Also, whether anyone likes it or not, some members are more important than others in that distinction.

On the Illusions Matt and Dizzy played, they were not on AFD-
If you weren't around back then, people complained about UYIs not being the same as Appetite.

I was around and do remember, but the people who complaint was a vast minority considering the hit they had with November rain, even Matt Sorum admitted he was wrong to criticize November rain before it came out when he saw how much people liked it.

There were people that complained about every album, every single one had its detractors because people are creatures of habit.

How dare a band evolve , it's outrageous!

[TheBaconman]

For myself, to be a evolution of music, there would have to be a continuum of musicians in the band.....  With guns there is only one member who has continuously been in the line up..   So to call the albums a evolution is wrong.  They are just different.  And to call them a evolution of just Axl, is also wrong.  Because CD is the first guns album he had full power and say on.   Now of the next album came out with the exact same musicians on it as CD and has a different sound, that could be argued as a evolution

It's certainly a stronger argument.

I was trying to say the same thing. You said it better.

Although like I said, I dont think they have to have the exact same musicians? But to change the roster altogether except one, then yeah its completely different. Also, whether anyone likes it or not, some members are more important than others in that distinction.

On the Illusions Matt and Dizzy played, they were not on AFD-
If you weren't around back then, people complained about UYIs not being the same as Appetite.

I was around and do remember, but the people who complaint was a vast minority considering the hit they had with November rain, even Matt Sorum admitted he was wrong to criticize November rain before it came out when he saw how much people liked it.

There were people that complained about every album, every single one had its detractors because people are creatures of habit.

How dare a band evolve , it's outrageous!

A lot of the songs on the UYI albums were written around the time of AFD, some even before AFD, some could of even been put on AFD...  How is that possibly evolving?   

[EmilyGNR]

Did the sound evolve because the people in the band changed, or did the people change because the sound evolved?





/jarmo

The sound never has evolved, it has changed.  And that's in part to having new musicians in the band and having Axl in the band as the boss

Did the people in the band leave because the music changed?  Maybe...   I think a few of the members left because Axl wanted to go in a different direction with the sound of the band.   They were employees at that time.  Not equal band members.  Would they of left if they were not employees?   I am not sure.  

You could argue that Axls musical tastes have evolved and have changed the direction of Guns..  But that will leas to the argument that Guns is ultimately the Axl Rose project...  

And again you cant even say his style has evolved on albums because he only had full control on CD, no other album

So was the CD a evolution of sound for guns or Axl?  No    It could of been the sound Axl has always wanted.  How is that a evolution if it is basically his fist album, with his first real sound

The true test of a evolution of sound would be the next album from guns.  If it had all the same players on it from CD, and moved in a different dirrection

By the dictionary meaning of evolve, GNR has evolved.

develop gradually, especially from a simple to a more complex form.
"the company has evolved into a major chemical manufacturer"
synonyms:   develop, progress, advance; More
mature, grow, expand, spread;
alter, change, transform, adapt, metamorphose;

[EmilyGNR]

For myself, to be a evolution of music, there would have to be a continuum of musicians in the band.....  With guns there is only one member who has continuously been in the line up..   So to call the albums a evolution is wrong.  They are just different.  And to call them a evolution of just Axl, is also wrong.  Because CD is the first guns album he had full power and say on.   Now of the next album came out with the exact same musicians on it as CD and has a different sound, that could be argued as a evolution

It's certainly a stronger argument.

I was trying to say the same thing. You said it better.

Although like I said, I dont think they have to have the exact same musicians? But to change the roster altogether except one, then yeah its completely different. Also, whether anyone likes it or not, some members are more important than others in that distinction.

On the Illusions Matt and Dizzy played, they were not on AFD-
If you weren't around back then, people complained about UYIs not being the same as Appetite.

I was around and do remember, but the people who complaint was a vast minority considering the hit they had with November rain, even Matt Sorum admitted he was wrong to criticize November rain before it came out when he saw how much people liked it.

There were people that complained about every album, every single one had its detractors because people are creatures of habit.

How dare a band evolve , it's outrageous!

A lot of the songs on the UYI albums were written around the time of AFD, some even before AFD, some could of even been put on AFD...  How is that possibly evolving?   

I'm very aware of what songs were written when.

UYIs were a departure of sorts from AFD, regardless of when the songs were written.

We are discussing Albums here.

[Wooody]

For myself, to be a evolution of music, there would have to be a continuum of musicians in the band.....  With guns there is only one member who has continuously been in the line up..   So to call the albums a evolution is wrong.  They are just different.  And to call them a evolution of just Axl, is also wrong.  Because CD is the first guns album he had full power and say on.   Now of the next album came out with the exact same musicians on it as CD and has a different sound, that could be argued as a evolution

It's certainly a stronger argument.

I was trying to say the same thing. You said it better.

Although like I said, I dont think they have to have the exact same musicians? But to change the roster altogether except one, then yeah its completely different. Also, whether anyone likes it or not, some members are more important than others in that distinction.

On the Illusions Matt and Dizzy played, they were not on AFD-
If you weren't around back then, people complained about UYIs not being the same as Appetite.

I was around and do remember, but the people who complaint was a vast minority considering the hit they had with November rain, even Matt Sorum admitted he was wrong to criticize November rain before it came out when he saw how much people liked it.

There were people that complained about every album, every single one had its detractors because people are creatures of habit.

How dare a band evolve , it's outrageous!

A lot of the songs on the UYI albums were written around the time of AFD, some even before AFD, some could of even been put on AFD...  How is that possibly evolving?   

You got a point there. If they were playing songs live (Dont cry 1986), then the sound of the band was already a bit like UYI even if AFD was not even out yet.
 

[Wooody]

Some people may confuse the sound of a band with them just choosing specific songs to make an album sound cohesive.

[jarmo]

The sound never has evolved, it has changed.  

That makes very little sense. The whole idea of evolving is that it doesn't stay the same. If something doesn't stay the same, it's changed....

Since you're so hung up on who plays on the songs, instead of the songs themselves.
How do you explain the fact that the songs Axl wrote in the 1980s doesn't sound exactly as the ones he wrote for Chinese Democracy? Is it just down to the fact that he had others around him pushing him in a certain direction? Is that what you're saying?

Or is this because he changed? Or is it because he evolved as an artist? The same can be said about any current or former band member as well.



/jarmo

[EmilyGNR]

Some people may confuse the sound of a band with them just choosing specific songs to make an album sound cohesive.

Who are those people that confuse "the sound of a band with them just choosing specific songs to make an album sound cohesive?"

[Wooody]

The sound never has evolved, it has changed.  

That makes very little sense. The whole idea of evolving is that it doesn't stay the same. If something doesn't stay the same, it's changed....

Since you're so hung up on who plays on the songs, instead of the songs themselves.
How do you explain the fact that the songs Axl wrote in the 1980s doesn't sound exactly as the ones he wrote for Chinese Democracy? Is it just down to the fact that he had others around him pushing him in a certain direction? Is that what you're saying?

Or is this because he changed? Or is it because he evolved as an artist? The same can be said about any current or former band member as well.



/jarmo

Yet I do see what he is trying to say. Its a valid point of view.

The way I see it he's talking about people.
Did GNR lead guitar evolve throughout the years or, did it change? He says it changed because the person doing the lead guitar playing changed. From Slash, to Buckethead, Robin, DJ Ashba?.

IF it had been Slash all those years, and he is displaying a different sound between 1987 and 2015 in the same band, then the way he sees it there's evolution.
IF we're talking about the lead guitar sound of the band between 1987 and 2015, he sees it as changing, not evolving, because its not the same person.

[Wooody]

Some people may confuse the sound of a band with them just choosing specific songs to make an album sound cohesive.

Who are those people that confuse "the sound of a band with them just choosing specific songs to make an album sound cohesive?"

The people doing the "pigeonholing"

[TheBaconman]

The sound never has evolved, it has changed.  

That makes very little sense. The whole idea of evolving is that it doesn't stay the same. If something doesn't stay the same, it's changed....

Since you're so hung up on who plays on the songs, instead of the songs themselves.
How do you explain the fact that the songs Axl wrote in the 1980s doesn't sound exactly as the ones he wrote for Chinese Democracy? Is it just down to the fact that he had others around him pushing him in a certain direction? Is that what you're saying?

Or is this because he changed? Or is it because he evolved as an artist? The same can be said about any current or former band member as well.



/jarmo

Axl has evolved...  I hope he has, he is around 50 years old and shouldn't be writing songs or singing like he was when he was in his early 20s.  But is Guns N Roses, just Axl?   You cant say the sound of guns has evolved, just because one member that was around from day one has.

I am not hung up on any artist or musician or who plays the songs.  I love the music.  But to say the Guns N Roses has evolved because the music on CD is different than AFD, is wrong.  The music is just that, different.  It changed..  

The only way the music can really evolve is if there is a steady lineup from one album to the next.  

[D-GenerationX]

The only way the music can really evolve is if there is a steady lineup from one album to the next.  

Agreed.

But my god, let's just stop dancing around it.  It you don't fully commit to the "evolve" premise, you have to admit Axl sacked the band that made them all famous and is continuing on with a sham version of GNR with a bunch of dudes that don't have anything to with their legacy.

Isn't that really what this is about, end of the day?

[Wooody]

The only way the music can really evolve is if there is a steady lineup from one album to the next.  

Agreed.

But my god, let's just stop dancing around it.  It you don't fully commit to the "evolve" premise, you have to admit Axl sacked the band that made them all famous and is continuing on with a sham version of GNR with a bunch of dudes that don't have anything to with their legacy.

Isn't that really what this is about, end of the day?

Haha, well that's a bit unfair at the dudes that worked on Chinese Democracy. Im sure they went in giving it their best. Which is why I was disappointed when Tommy said he was grateful for the ''Gig'', like it was a job that paid well. Maybe he saw it like that all along but I don't think all of them did. DJ certainly didnt, but he left. 

[jarmo]

Yet I do see what he is trying to say. Its a valid point of view.

The way I see it he's talking about people.
Did GNR lead guitar evolve throughout the years or, did it change? He says it changed because the person doing the lead guitar playing changed. From Slash, to Buckethead, Robin, DJ Ashba?.

IF it had been Slash all those years, and he is displaying a different sound between 1987 and 2015 in the same band, then the way he sees it there's evolution.
IF we're talking about the lead guitar sound of the band between 1987 and 2015, he sees it as changing, not evolving, because its not the same person.

Yeah, the logic is that since you changed the players, the sound can't have evolved.
Even though there's the one guy there who's been the constant through all the changes.

I just don't agree with that.

Axl has evolved...  I hope he has, he is around 50 years old and shouldn't be writing songs or singing like he was when he was in his early 20s.  But is Guns N Roses, just Axl?   You cant say the sound of guns has evolved, just because one member that was around from day one has.

I am not hung up on any artist or musician or who plays the songs.  I love the music.  But to say the Guns N Roses has evolved because the music on CD is different than AFD, is wrong.  The music is just that, different.  It changed..

So you admit the fact that the constant who's been in the band since day one has evolved, you can see that. But you can't see that because he has evolved, it would affect the music he writes for the band called Guns N' Roses, and thus making the band's music evolve as a result....

The way you see it is that the chef in the kitchen went to Europe for a year to study cooking, but when he got back, he's still just making the same cheese burgers as he was cooking before the trip.... Even though the kitchen staff changed and they're introduced new ingredients for the items on the menu. They didn't evolve because people learned and experienced new things, they changed! 


 


/jarmo

[D-GenerationX]

Haha, well that's a bit unfair at the dudes that worked on Chinese Democracy. Im sure they went in giving it their best. Which is why I was disappointed when Tommy said he was grateful for the ''Gig'', like it was a job that paid well. Maybe he saw it like that all along but I don't think all of them did. DJ certainly didnt, but he left. 

Agreed.

But all this pushback and the passionate defenses of the band simply "evolving" always seem to be about convincing people that anything Axl throws out there is as GNR as it ever was, and you should just accept it.  

They don't want to hear any sort of dissent at all that this is GNR in name only or basically an entire different operation.  That's treasonous thinking.

[jarmo]

Boohoo. The band changed.

"They" don't wanna hear you cry about it 20 years later. Maybe that's it....



/jarmo

[CherryGarcia]

Axl, in his own words, said that post 1995 was to be a new band which shared the name Guns N' Roses...Are we to dismiss Axl's own words and claim that this band, and the pre-1995 band, are one and the same?

"This will serve as notice [that] effective [...] Decemeber 30th 1995, I will withdraw from the partnership. [...] I intend to use the name 'Guns N' Roses' in connection with a new group which I will form."

[jarmo]

Axl, in his own words, said that post 1995 was to be a new band which shared the name Guns N' Roses...Are we to dismiss Axl's own words and claim that this band, and the pre-1995 band, are one and the same?

"This will serve as notice [that] effective [...] Decemeber 30th 1995, I will withdraw from the partnership. [...] I intend to use the name 'Guns N' Roses' in connection with a new group which I will form."

And you're dismissing what he said in 2008!

Personally I call this Guns and the Illusions or previous lineups old Guns.

Same band name, different line ups.



/jarmo